The Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 is a piece of anti-terrorism legislation from New Zealand.

In the first test of the Act, during the 2007 New Zealand anti-terror raids, the Solicitor-General declined to press charges under it, because the legislation was too complex.

On 8 November 2007, the Solicitor General declined to prosecute under the Terrorism Suppression Act, citing insufficient evidence, and described the legislation as "complex and incoherent", and "almost impossible to apply to domestic circumstances

And remind me which party was in government writing crap legislation and wrecking NZ's economy from 1999-2008?

"The Government says controversial fixit legislation it wants to introduce to Parliament under urgency next week is needed because a Supreme Court ruling on the Urewera terror trials means 40 prospective trial and 50 police operations are at risk. "

Via the link in my original post.

I stand by my interpretation that the root cause is crap Liarbour legislation. If it had been written properly all 18 terrorists would have been locked up 4 years ago.

It's the Nats' crap Search and Surveillance Act that's at issue. But if you can't see a birth certificate when it's put in front of your nose, you're really going to battle with this. That's why you want the state to be able to break into your house and plant cameras. It's freedom!

About Me

Semi-retired, enjoying the rural lifestyle, watching the grass grow and keeping a watchful eye, via my wireless connection at dialup speeds, on the world of rampant local and central government bureaucracy...